美國專利法上「具有通常技術者」之探討

「具有通常技術者」爲美國專利法上一擬制之人，原文「Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art」，簡稱「PHOSITA」，是美國專利法第103條中判斷非顯而易知性之標準，十分重要。我國專利法第22條進步性規定中，亦仿傚有一擬制之「具有通常知識者」，故值得研究。因擬制之人的抽象性致其有不確定性，故本文將予以定性。首先，尋找其擬制緣起，以瞭解其在何種背景之下被引入美國專利法中。繼之，探究美國侵權行爲法上之「合理人」與其被引入之間是否存有關聯性。並研究「合理人」之建構及內涵，以與其做一對照。「具有通常技術者」其與美國專利法上第112條致能要求之「熟悉該項技術者」，兩者在文義上均以「技術」爲其表徵，故本文以「技術水準」爲其研究重心，分別討論之。另針對該擬制之人的內涵，將探討其是否爲特定人，例如，其是否爲法官、審查官、發明人、專家、陪審團員或外國人等。次而，瞭解「具有通常技術者」是否等同於「熟悉該項技術者」。再者，目前多國仿傚「具有通常技術者」，然若該擬制之人的適用會因「後見之明」而產生偏誤，將是嚴重問題。本文擬說明偏誤之發生原因，藉由統計方式量化偏誤之程度，引KSR案以瞭解該案對後見之明之影響，並提出解決偏誤之二元測試法。最後，本文觀察國際間仿傚該擬制之人之概況，並輔以我國現行規範做比較分析。

關鍵字

具有通常知識者；進步性；致能要求；合理人；後見之明； KSR

並列摘要

A ”person having ordinary skill in the art”, with the acronym PHOSITA, is the legal fiction in section 103 of the United States' Patent Law for the expression of nonobviousness, wherein a similar legal fiction can also be found in section 22 of our Patent Act for the expression of inventive step. These legal fictions are important because they are the supporting elements to the patentability. Due to appearance of uncertainty shown by the legal fiction, this paper clarifies the contents of PHOSITA by tracing back to its history, comparing with the analogized ”reasonable person” in torts, in order to appreciate the judicial reasoning provided in cases and therefore acquire a clearer picture of this legal fiction. Further, this paper proposes to analyze the level of skill of the PHOSITA, along with that of another legal fiction ”person skilled in the art”, found in section 112 of the U.S. Patent Law, to better understand the degree of knowledge of related technology possessed by them. In particular, this paper discusses whether this legal fiction can be a certain person, such as a (an) examiner, expert, judge, juror, or foreigner, to further provide this legal fiction an even clearer identification. On the other hand, this paper also evaluates whether the PHOSITA equates the ”person skilled in the art” in section 112, distinguishing the applications rendered by them in fields of nonobviousness and enablement. Given that the PHOSITA was created by the U.S. Patent Law, many countries had established the similar legal fictions accordingly. The hindsight bias created by PHOSITA would be a severe problem based on the situation that there are many similar legal fictions in the world currently. Thus, an experimental research is introduced to indicate the significance of the biases, and a considerably helpful bifurcating method to ameliorate these biases is also provided. Last, this paper briefly surveys these similar legal fictions adopted and named by these countries and international organizations, such as Germany, Japan, mainland China, and WTO, supplementing with a comparative study of the PHOSITA and the legal fictions in our Patent Act.